| Author |
Message
|
| wskibum |
 Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 2:08 pm Post subject: Trouble with cluster concept |
 |
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 38
Location: Northern California
|
Looking to configure something like:
Local queue in A clustered
A: >>>>>>>> B:
>
>
>>>>>>>C:
HA
Put to A becomes available for get in B
If B is down becomes available for get in C
I am brand new at clustering, I have searching and reading for days and have run out of time. When I create the cluster it works in reverse.
ANY help would be appreciated |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| As per your other thread, clustering has nothing to do with high availability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wskibum |
| Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 38
Location: Northern California
|
Sorry about 2 threads, posted in the wrong area and couldn't find a way to delete it.
That's noit a very constructive comment. Something like :That won't work, or that might work but you need to look for other options would have been more help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20697
Location: LI,NY
|
| wskibum wrote: |
Sorry about 2 threads, posted in the wrong area and couldn't find a way to delete it.
That's noit a very constructive comment. Something like :That won't work, or that might work but you need to look for other options would have been more help. |
Well there was a huge hint there that you seem to have missed.
What Jeff is essentially telling you is that MQ Cluster and HA Cluster are 2 completely different things... as well as MQ Cluster and WAS Cluster with JMS Engine (SIBUS) are 2 completely different things...
Have fun reading up... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wskibum |
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 9:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 38
Location: Northern California
|
My bad, should not have used the term "HA". Instead lets call it "Work Load Balancing"
Here is a quote is from IBM regarding the subject. If it sound familiar it's because basically it's what I am trying to do.
“Workload balancing:
When a cluster contains more than one instance of the same queue, workload balancing determines the best queue manager to route
A message to. It takes into consideration:
-the availability of channels, the queue manager and queues
-how to treat a local copy of the queue (CLWLUSEQ in v6).” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wskibum |
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 10:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 38
Location: Northern California
|
Actually the solution to this was very simple, too bad it took me so long to figure out.
Local queues are created on B & C instead of A. I had it backwards.
Does round robin by default, fiddling with rank and priority settings now.
A great resource was found here which helped me to understand where I was going wrong.
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/iseries/v5r2/ic2924/books/csqzah03.pdf |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20697
Location: LI,NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| wskibum |
| Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 38
Location: Northern California
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
